Chris
Posted : 10/25/2006 3:36:02 PM
I guess the point of my responses was missed because I can't argue with someone's choice of dog food based on
experience. If you think your dog does well, and you feed Ol' Roy, how could I possibly tell you that your sky is not blue?
My point is that we either debate the quality of dog food based on fixed, measurable indicators, or we tell stories. If we're telling stories, then this is not an argument/debate. If we are comparing food based on something we can actually measure, then aside from ingredients and cost, what's left?
Think of it this way, I ask you which is a better food, Ol' Roy or Canidae? We have heard that some dogs do well on one or the other through anecdotal evidence, so no help there. So, prove to me one is better than the other
without telling me a story. How are you going to do it?
By the way, why is the mere mention of setting a budget for dog food such a hot button? I set a budget for my meals. Why shouldn't cost be a factor for my dog's meals? I have never implied that selecting a food within a certain price range is bad, nor have I advocated spending more to get quality food. I only mean to infer that price (as in value) is a factor in determing the overall quality of a food.
It's fine with me if you want to set yourself on a gallows (I'll even pull the lever if you want), but I haven't criticized anyone's choice of food yet (because there's no debate there). Only that Purina products, in most cases, are lower quality than comparably priced "premium" brands.